## Facts

- Anne E. Eckis worked for Sea World Corporation as a secretary to Kent Burgess, Sea World’s director of animal training.
- Burgess asked Eckis to ride “Shamu,” a killer whale, for employer-sponsored publicity photographs.
- Sea World furnished Eckis’s bikini, provided coaching by its trainers, and conducted the training and photo session on its premises during Eckis’s regular work hours.
- During the third ride, Shamu did not follow a signal; Eckis fell into the water and the whale bit her hips and legs, causing serious lacerations requiring extensive stitches and resulting in several weeks off work.
- Sea World continued Eckis’s salary during her recovery and paid her medical expenses.
- Eckis filed both a civil tort action (seeking compensatory and punitive damages) and a workers’ compensation claim; Sea World contended workers’ compensation was her exclusive remedy.
- A jury found for Eckis and awarded $75,000 in compensatory damages, implicitly finding the injury did not arise out of and in the course of employment.

## Issues

1. Whether Eckis’s injury during an employer-requested, employer-controlled publicity activity arose out of and in the course of employment under California workers’ compensation law.
2. If so, whether workers’ compensation exclusivity barred Eckis’s civil tort claims against Sea World and Burgess.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeal reversed the civil judgment for Eckis.
- The court held, as a matter of law, that Eckis was acting within the course and scope of her employment when she rode Shamu for Sea World’s publicity photographs.
- Because the injury was industrial, workers’ compensation provided the exclusive remedy, precluding the tort action against both Sea World and Burgess.

## Legal Principles

- California workers’ compensation coverage is construed liberally in favor of finding employment-related injury.
- An injury arises in the course of employment when the employee performs an activity requested by the employer and sufficiently connected to the employer’s business, including promotional activities intended to benefit the employer.
- Workers’ compensation exclusivity applies even when the assigned activity is unusual, outside the employee’s ordinary duties, or entails heightened risk, so long as it is undertaken for the employer’s benefit under employer direction or control.
- Where the material facts are essentially undisputed and compel only one conclusion under the governing standard, course-and-scope may be decided as a question of law, notwithstanding a contrary jury finding.

## Conclusion

Because Eckis was injured while carrying out an employer-directed publicity assignment on Sea World’s premises during work hours for Sea World’s benefit, her injury was within the course of employment and her civil tort recovery was barred by workers’ compensation exclusivity.


Eckis v. Sea World Corp., 64 Cal. App. 3d 1 (Ct. App. 4th Dist. 1976)